Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.

While there is no general agreement or uniformity of structural and cultural aspects of community organizations, grassroots organizers have some common tradition and perceptive.

Organization’s structural characters are strict, nonflexible, created and preserved by documentation, and contingency centred. The structure is taken on “officially,” on the basis of known rules and events. It decide how the organization is made-up to operate and for what reasons.

The cultural definitions of people, situation, events, information, objects, facts, procedure are essential for organizational choices and movement. The common properties of structure and culture are:

Contingency-cantered

Ideology-cantered

Cultural Features

Structural Features

Documented Word-of-mouth

Formal Informal

Fixed Flexible

It is impossible to do split structure and culture, in practice. So organizational structure spells out the place to be occupied by members of an organization and culture defines the task to go with those place and the kinds of people.

3.1.2 Relationship between an organisation’s structure and culture and the effects on business performance

Structure

The basic objects of organizational structure are the books – constitutions and bylaws. These books begin with the broad aims and principles of the organization and they reflect the central values and interests of the membership, constituency, or clientele.

Structural definition also describes the organization’s resource base. A lot of organizations normally define their curriculum of membership in bylaws. Some of them even state the amount of annual dues for each. The books describe formal offices or positions in the organization. Not always same as labour branches, as stating who does what. Tax-exemption options may also be written.

Decision-making activities are planned in structural documentation. The common types of organizational choices are: structural, management, policy, adjudication, and supervision. Constitutions and Bylaws state the actors and way to alter in the structure itself. The total membership, annual assembly or congress, is exclusively authorized to change the basic structure. Policy matters are typically left to leadership bodies meeting more frequently. And management is often delegated to staff.

Culture

Cultural aspects are those that evolve in discussion and are in fluctuation, constantly modifying. Many cases organizational culture describes what things signify, whether good or bad, right or wrong, and how to accomplish them when can’t be set-up by formal process.

The culture encourages effective philosophy for possibility in the organization’s daily work done. Comparing with basic principles, it’s the fleeting operational philosophy – fashioned, shaped, and broadcasted in common knowledge and conversation about that understanding – that tells a corporate flack catcher.

The culture progresses the organization forward when it fixes the jobs and the category of labour. Culture shows some other crucial and equivalent role by reflecting experiences in the past and keeping away from occurring again of emergency. For example, when an organization learnt about relying on a sole leader to broker of its inner interest. Likewise, relying totally on one source of money doesn’t continue long life.

Culture can be felt more in its definition of roles than other way. Culture defines how people visualize of the causes and ways for actions. Leaders under the grasp of organizational culture are informed that, they may take decision, appropriating the managerial authority of the membership wrong. Also, staff appreciation to act follows from a thoughtful of a spoken “organizing model,” another surface of the organization’s culture.

3.1.3 Influence of individual behaviour at work

Issues that influence individual behaviour at work are:

1) The approaches & potentials of management and positive or negative foundation in a work place – salary, inducement, raises, appreciation, gratitude of staff and so forth

2) The Spirits of the setting comprises the approaches of lower management and employees’ altogether.

3) The setting of the work place – outlooks, niceness, cleanness, pleasantness etc.

4) The complete achievement of the business – a winning business tends to be more positive, fruitful and vice versa

5) The moral and business exercise & principles of the governing partners, managers or owners are introductory of the behaviour in a work place.

3.2 Different approaches to management and leadership

Earlier, leadership was meant the work done by people at the top of the organization and that management was meant the work done by all in the middle of the organization. Yet, this positional view does not need to be that way. Management and leadership are both essential components of a winning organization.

The differences between leadership and management

A leader sets the direction in any organization. He always imagines the future of the organization and evangelise that position. Leadership is discovering the prospect and deciding where to go.

Management concentrates on keeping the company straight and moving in its prospectus direction. It’s not about picking a point on the horizon and going there. Management is about plotting progress towards the spot on the horizon.

Leaders are often the impassioned individuals who will yell & kick & scream — something that managers find detestable. When seeking out the leader that you require to support your ability to manage, look for the person most challenging to control. That person has potential as a leader.

Great organizations recognize that being lovely at one of these two roles is a great feat in itself, but a one that excels at both leadership & management is very hard, if not impossible, to find. That’s why most organizations have a separate chief executive officer & a chief operations officer. The chief executive officer is the leader of the organization, responsible for charting a coursework. The chief operations officer is the manager responsible for ensuring that the ship follows the charted coursework. They work together to make the organization as effective as feasible.

The formula for success

An organization needs to synthesize a model of the leadership/management combination if it desires to be truly winning. If you’re in the position to hire someone, you’ll require looking for complementary skills. If you’re a natural leader you’ll require hiring someone with strong management skills. Similarly, if you’re great at managing things you’ll require to make definite that you include leaders in the organization so that you’ve a source for the leadership you’ll require. Yet, hiring these skills is a luxury that few managers can afford. Instead, think about how to identify & encourage these skills in the people you already have working with you.

In most cases, you’ll require to try on your counterpart for size before announcing to them what you’re doing. You’ll require starting by asking your counterpart candidate questions & making requests, which lead them in to filling the role without exposing the grand vision. For your budding leader candidate, simple open-ended questions like “What do you think they ought to do about this chance?” can lead to a wealth of information. The manager may be able to reply to “Will you keep track of the action items for this series of meetings?” with the kind of support that you require.

If you’re looking for a manager, the ideal candidate to tap is one who likes method,This person arrives at the same time each day & leaves at the same time. Individuals who are regimented in what they do are usually great at management because they’re lovely at executing the same control processes day in & day out.

You may also discover a manager candidate in the one that is the most organized. The person doesn’t must be obsessed with being neat; Yet, there always seems to be organization to what they’re doing. They seek to organize, classify, & generate structure for everything they do.

Chances are that if you’ve followed the above method you’ve found someone within your organization to be your counterpart. That has in it an inherent challenge. As humans they tend to value, respect, & understand the value of the things we’re lovely at. A leader will recognize lovely leadership & a manager will recognize lovely management. Yet, in order to keep the balance it will be important to learn to respect the attributes that your counterpart brings. On the surface, this seems easy but it may be the most difficult part of incorporating both leadership & management in your organization. If you’re a leader, you’ll be tempted to plow ahead without project review meetings, milestones, & action item reviews. But these are the very things that a manager needs to manage. Similarly, as a manager you may not understand half-day meetings to discuss strategy.

Once you’re comfortable together with your decision & the counterpart that you’ve selected, it’s time to let them in on the grand plan–after all you don’t require her to leave after you’ve gotten to depend on her for something important. You’ll require reporting that she’s an important part of leading & managing your department. This may mean exposing to her your limitations but it’s likely essential to let her understand what you’re saying.

Organizational Behaviour studies encompass the study of organizations from multiple viewpoints, methods, & levels of analysis. for example, one textbook divides these multiple viewpoints in to three perspectives: modern, symbolic, & post-modern. Another traditional distinction, present in American academia, is between the study of “micro” organizational behaviour-which refers to individual & group dynamics in an organizational setting-and “macro” strategic management & organizational theory which studies whole organizations & industries, how they change, & the strategies, structures & contingencies that guide them. To this distinction, some students have added an interest in “meso” — primarily interested in power, culture, & the networks of individuals & units in organizations-and “field” level analysis, which study how whole populations of organizations, interact. In Europe these distinctions do exist as well, but are more seldom reflected in departmental divisions.

3.2.1 Principles & practices of organising & of management

One of the main goals of organizational theorists is, according to Simms (1994) “to revitalize organizational theory & create a better conceptualisation of organizational life.” An organizational theorist ought to carefully think about levels assumptions being made in theory, & is concerned to help managers & administrators.

Whenever people interact in organizations, lots of factors come in to play. Modern organizational studies try to understand & model these factors. Like all modernist social sciences, organizational studies seek to control, predict, & report. there is some controversy over the ethics of controlling workers’ behaviour, as well as the manner in which workers are treated. As such, organizational behaviour or OB (and its cousin, Industrial psychology) has at times been accused of being the scientific tool of the powerful. Those accusations notwithstanding, OB can play a major role in organizational development, enhancing organizational performance, as well as individual & group performance/satisfaction/commitment.

The systems framework is also essential to organizational theory as organizations are complex dynamic goal-oriented processes. One of the early thinkers in the field was Alexander Bogdanov, who developed his Tectology, a theory widely considered a precursor of Bertalanffy’s General Systems Theory, aiming to model & design human organizations. Kurt Lewin was influential in developing the systems point of view within organizational theory & coined the term “systems of ideology”, from his frustration with behavioural psychologies that became a hindrance to sustainable work in psychology (see Ash 1992: 198-207). The complexity theory point of view on organizations is another systems view of organizations.

The systems approach to organizations depends heavily on achieving negative entropy through openness & feedback. A systemic view on organizations is transdisciplinary & integrative. In other words, it transcends the perspectives of individual disciplines, integrating them on the basis of a common “code”, or more exactly, on the basis of the formal equipment provided by systems theory. The systems approach gives primacy to the interrelationships, not to the elements of the method. it is from these dynamic interrelationships that new properties of the method emerge. In recent years, systems thinking have been developed to provide techniques for studying systems in holistic ways to supplement traditional reductionistic methods. In this more recent custom, some as a humanistic extension of the natural sciences considers systems theory in organizational studies.

3.2.2 Different approaches to management

Motivation the forces either internal or outside to a individual that arouse enthusiasm & resistance to pursue a definite coursework of action. According to Baron et al. (2008): “Although motivation is a broad & complicated concept, organizational scientists have agreed on its basic characteristics. Drawing from various social sciences, they define motivation as the set of processes that arouse, direct, & maintain human behaviour toward attaining some goal”

In the same period, ideas of job design such as job enrichment & job enlargement were inquired in to. It was felt that people would give more to an organization in the event that they gained satisfaction from their jobs. Jobs ought to be designed to be fascinating & challenging to gain the dedication of workers – a central theme of HRM.

The human relations & human factors approaches were absorbed in to a broad behavioural science movement in the 1950’s & 1960’s. This period produced some influential theories on the motivation of human performance. For example, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs provided an individual focus on the reasons why people work. They argued that people satisfied an ascending series of needs from survival, through security to eventual ‘self-actualization’.

Classic theories were produced in the 1950s & 1960s within the human relations framework. By the 1970s most managers participating in formal management training were aware of: Theory X & Theory Y (McGregor, 1960); of Maslow & Herzberg’s motivation theories; & knew where they ought to be in terms of the managerial grid (Blake & Mouton, 1964). These theorists advocated participative, ‘soft’ approaches to management. Yet , only a minority of managers in the USA received such training, with even fewer in other countries. Most operational managers – concerned with production, engineering, or distribution – had worked their way up from low-level jobs: they were probably closer in spirit to F.W. Taylor than the theorists of the 1950s & 1960s. This contrasted with personnel departments with a higher proportion of individuals who had received academic training; additionally, ‘personnel’ was an area where females were prevalent – as against production, which was male dominated. Were females naturally more open to human relations ideas than men?

The received wisdom in the literature on organisational modify is that worker involvement is crucial to winning modify, in situations that require attitudinal & cultural modify. Therefore, any speedy organisational transformations can only be winning in the event that they focus on structural as reverse to cultural modifies. The case with M&S is a scenario of speedy organisational transformation, which was based on a vision imposed on the company in a chiefly directive fashion, down from the top, by its management & CEO, but which could potentially lead to a widespread modify of approaches & behaviours in the company. This modify in the midst of the trading period was a dicy action & would bring a sizable confusion for the staff, putting a high pressure on their performance. It was an emergent modify where staff had to create & alter to new ways of a flatter organisational structure & new ways of operations under new business units.

Most theories are not entirely new – they change or create older ideas due to perceived inadequacies in the originals. Management thinking is like an incoming tide: each wave comes further up the beach, then retreats, leaving a miniscule behind to be overtaken by the next wave. you can also think about the limitations of commonsense & the fact that most issues have been experienced already, in some form, by someone else. they can learn from that wider experience, whereas commonsense is essentially individual.

One of the reasons behind the proposed modify is to modify the approaches & behaviours of the staff. People are being necessary to reconsider their approaches towards how work is performed & their approaches to their counterparts externally. Whatever form it takes, if it is to be winning , there are three people-related activities that require to be undertaken: generating willingness to change; involving people, & sustaining the momentum (Doorewaard & Benschop, 2003; Burnes, 2004). M&S in seeking to generate willingness & a readiness for modify require to be aware that stressing the positive aspects of the proposed modify may have much a negative impact on the company’s performance. Therefore, M&S must make people fully aware of the pressure for such modify in the coursework of the trading period, giving them an ongoing feedback on the performance & areas of activity within the organisation, & understanding staff’s fears & concerns. A constant communication & involvement will must be present, providing resources & explanations for modify. Aligned line managers will must give all support needed to the modify agents, create new competence & skills & reinforce desired behaviours, such as increased pay or bonus.

In the case of M&S, it can be seen that the company deliberately set out to modify the basis on which it competed by reinventing itself as a service-based organisation. One of the standard perceptions for winning organizations is that they ought to know their own strengths & weaknesses, their customers’ needs & the nature of the setting in which they operate. Hence, by introducing new business units M&S aimed to generate them fully profit-accountable, putting more emphasis on the individual performance of the departments. This would enable M&S to effectively control their operations & show where the improvements require to be implemented. Hence, by this new approach to business practices, the company had to closely think about strategic issues of HRM.

The new changes to business units & flatter company structure are likely to increase worker empowerment & responsibility, increasing more of the direct contacts with customers & building new knowledge. Post-Modern theories recommend better flexible strategies, accommodating modify in the structure of power relationships, where they specialise in their field of tasks (Johnson & Scholes, 2002; Francis, 2003), To become more flexible ASD Adecided to apply a more horizontal management organization style. Through a clear leadership role of appointed heads of business units, centralisation will even be high only to a definite degree, not to prevent adaptability & flexibility of staff. Coordination will require to be in a type of a clear structured hierarchy & division of labour. To encourage job enrichment & staff satisfaction, ASDA may establish one or more specific coordinating roles. Liaisons, individual or departmental, committees, task forces, project groups, & the like are all examples of feasible structural coordinating devices.

Many modern theorists think that in order to succeed business culture needs to be change-oriented &, hence, ASDA need to change to differentiating changing settings & internal workforce diversity.

3.3 Relationship between motivational theories

The word motivation is coined from the Latin word “movere”, which means to move. Motivation is defined as an internal drive that activates behaviour & gives it direction. The term motivation theory is concerned with the processes that describe why & how human behaviour is activated & directed. it is regarded as one of the most important areas of study in the field of organizational behaviour. There are two different categories of motivation theories such as content theories, & method theories. Although there are different motivation theories, none of them are usually accepted.

3.3.1 Different leadership styles & their effectiveness

Of the different types of content theories, the most famous content theory is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs. Maslow introduced four levels of basic needs through his theory. Basic needs are categorized as physiological needs, safety & security needs, needs of affection, needs for self esteem & needs for self-actualization.

also known as need theory, the content theory of motivation chiefly focuses on the internal factors that energize & direct human behaviour. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Alderfer’s ERG theory, Herzeberg’s motivator-hygiene theory (Herzeberg’s dual factors theory), & McClelland’s learned needs or three-needs theory are a number of the major content theories.

3.3.2 Different motivational theories & their application

Another type of motivation theory is method theory. Method theories of motivation provide an opportunity to understand thought processes that influence behaviour. The major method theories of motivation include Adams’ equity theory, Vroom’s expectancy theory, goal-setting theory, & reinforcement theory. Expectancy, instrumentality, & valence are the key concepts explained in the expectancy theory. Aim setting theory suggests that the individuals are motivated to reach set goals. It also requires that the set goals should be specific. Reinforcement theory is concerned with controlling behaviour by manipulating its consequences.

Like Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, ERG theory explains existence, relatedness, & growth needs. Through dual factors theory, Herzeberg describes definite factors in the workplace, which lead to job satisfaction. McClelland’s learned needs or three-needs theory makes use of a projective process called the Thematic Aptitude check (TAT) so as to evaluate people based on two needs: power, achievement, & affiliation. People with high need of power take action in a way that influences the other’s behavior.

In spite of huge research, basic as well as applied, the subject of motivation is not clearly understood & most of the time poorly practiced. To understand motivation one must understand human nature itself. & There lies the problem!

The job of a manager in the workplace is to get things finished through employees. To do this the manager should be able to motivate employees. But that’s easier said than finished! Motivation practice & theory are difficult subjects, touching on several disciplines.

apart from the benefit & moral value of an altruistic approach to treating colleagues as human beings & respecting human dignity in all its forms, research & observations show that well motivated employees are more productive & inventive. The inverse also holds true. The schematic below indicates the potential contribution the practical application of the principles this paper has on reducing work content in the organization.

Human nature can be simple, yet complex. An understanding & appreciation of this is a prerequisite to effective worker motivation in the workplace & therefore effective management & leadership.

Psychologist Abraham Maslow said that people are motivated by attempts to fulfil their personal needs. Here are some examples of how his Hierarchy of Needs explains motivation in the workplace. Basic physiological needs are met with lovely ventilation (breathing), toilets (excretion), as well as a break at the finish of the day (sleep). Safety & security is covered with security personnel (personal safety), safety equipment like hard hats & goggles in factories (physical safety), as well as a regular paypacket (financial security). Friendship as well as a feeling of belonging comes from relationships with co-workers. These are all “deficiency needs”, without which people cannot work well. in the event that they have been met at least to a point, then the “growth needs” of achievement, creativity, & problem-solving can be pursued.

3.3.3 The relationship between motivation theory & the practice of management

Expectancy theory recognises the relationship between effort, performance & reward. Most of us have had an annual performance assessment, where they examine what they did in the last year, & get feedback on it. They then set goals for the next twelve months. The goals need to be specific (clear & measurable), challenging (not simple, but not excessively difficult), & justified (we often set them ourselves, in the context of the organisation). This comes straight from Edwin Locke’s goal-setting theory. Of coursework the ability must be there before setting goals – asking a human resources specialist to design electrical circuits doesn’t make sense. Material incentives to accomplish the goals, such as a bonus, may improve dedication.

Frederick Herzberg’s two-factor theory builds on Maslow’s ideas, calling his deficiency needs “hygiene factors”, which demotivate when absent, but do not inspire when fulfilled. The “motivator factors” are what get people working better: meaningful job content, a sense of responsibility, & recognition for their effort. Expectancy theory, from Victor Vroom, tries to show how people pick to do things, than what they actually do. Let’s say a company executive desires to join the management board. The attractiveness of this outcome for him, or valence, is high. They decide to start a brand new product range: they has a high expectancy that they can make it winning. They know that the board values initiative, so if it is winning, this will give him the credibility they needs to join the board (instrumentality). These two concepts are given numerical values & are used to calculate the motivational force.

Goal setting appears to be popular & effective, but it’s some shortcomings, most notably that quality often suffers in the name of quantity. For example, if I’m a salesperson, & my aim is to increase the number of customers I see in a day, then the quality of those interactions will suffer as I need to do things more quickly & move on to the next customer. No matter how polite I’m, some customers might even see a quick discussion as pushy or rude.

3.4 Working with others, teamwork, groups and group dynamics

A group is a collection of two or more interacting individuals in a stable pattern of relationships, provides rewards to its members, who share goals, and perceive themselves as a group.

Mere aggregates of people do not fit this definition because they do not interact and do not perceive themselves to be a group even in the event that they are aware of each other as, for example, a crowd on a street comer watching some event (nominal groups). True groups posses all of the qualities of groups, the quality of interaction (interacting groups).

Group characteristics:

· two or more people in social interaction.

· rewards to members.

· stable structure.

· members share common interests or goals.

· individuals must perceive themselves as a group.

3.4.1 the nature of groups and group behaviour within organisations

Formal and Informal Groups

Individuals join groups, or are assigned to groups, to achieve various purposes. If a manager to help the organization achieve its goals forms the group, then it qualifies as a formal group. Formal groups usually wear such labels as work group, team, committee, quality circle, or task force. An informal group exists when the members’ overriding purpose of getting together is friendship. Although formal and informal groups often overlap, such as a team of corporate auditors heading for the tennis courts after work, some employees are not friends with their co﷓workers.

There’s several practices of leadership: Model the Way, Inspire a Shared Vision, Challenge the routine, Enable Others to Act, Encourage the Heart. Model the Way means practicing what you preach; encourage others to be excellent by doing so yourself. Inspire a Shared Vision includes discovering a common objective or value that everybody can work toward, which can mean increased productivity and workplace satisfaction. Enable Others to Act means not empowering and inspiring them, but also to help by giving them what they need to succeed and contribute. Encourage the Heart means appreciating others for what they add to a project or workforce. As far as a practice that is an area of strength for me, Encourage the Heart is certainly an area of strength because my organization has gotten me in the habit of doing so. They initially were required to write “appreciations,” whether in e-mails, cards, or small bits of paper. They even made Appreciation Boxes in order to express thanks and recognition. It became a habit, and now i am appreciating people on a regular basis. It’s simple to do and it’s a very positive thing. People have always said that i am a thoughtful person, anyway, so it’s simple for me to recognize what people do for me and the things in which I believe.

It’s important to recognize what people contribute to your work efforts. Today, they ran a service day about animal care and cruelty for my middle school students. they visited an animal shelter and spent the day learning about issues related to animals, and then making toys for the canines and felines. My program depends on donations from the community in order to run, and they needed lots of yarn to make toys for the felines. A small but lovely knitting store donated $182 worth of yarn for our project, which was mind-blowing! The store’s donation heartened my students’ efforts and allowed for lots of shelter animals to have fun toys to play with. In thanks for the donation, they took lots of pics of toys made with the yarn in order to send them to her, along with a card.

It is great to be able to work well under your own steam, but for a company to function winningly, there also needs to be effective teamwork. Often times this happens basically but often, it takes hard work and time to work well together. Everybody needs to learn to accept and comprehend each other and not all pull in different directions. in lieu of using teamwork as a chance to show off or pull focus, each member needs to focus on the lovely of the group.

3.4.2 Effective teamwork and their influences

You may think that in case you’re communicating effectively, then your are listening. But this isn’t always the case. You may be able to communicate your point well but are you actually listening to what your colleagues must say about the subject? To truly listen you need to focus on what they are saying without judging or thinking about the way you would modify or counteract it.

Communication is the key to any effective teamwork. in case you can’t share ideas and get your point across in a supportive setting then it will be difficult to

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below: